Arising from the present backdrop, the following simple proposals can be termed as “system changes” in keeping with its current usage by the polity. However, they are aimed at reforming, changing and refining the procedures in the existing system rather than totally replacing it with an alien “breakthrough” style juggernaut.
Ensure the “equality of vote” as the primary requirement of a genuine democratic election as required under the United Nations Human Rights Declaration – 1948. It can be ensured by genuinely allocating the 225 seats to parties based simply on their national vote percentage at a General Election or District vote percentage at a Provincial Councils (PCs) Election. It is the primary function and objective of any election. At a General Election, such nationally allocated seats of each party can be apportioned to Districts as well as electorates if necessary, by again applying the percentage arithmetic to enable the assignment of Parliamentarians to Districts and/or electorates using the “largest remainder method”. The benefits are that it i). ensures “equal value” to each valid vote cast in the North, South, East and West, ii). the rational and transparent allocation of seats, to the national Parliament and PCs, for redistribution among Districts and/or electorates, which boosts voter confidence in the system, and iii). fosters the much desired “Sri Lankan-ness”.
Ensure the election of “country first political professionals” as people’s representatives to achieve the secondary objective of an election (necessitated by Sri Lanka’s failed representative democracy). Towards this end, firstly, repeal the infamous optional “preference voting mechanism”. The immediate benefits are that the electoral process will instantly become very much simpler, more meaningful and non-violent, the official expenditure, and time and energy expended will come down drastically, the election results can be announced by midnight, and the total election exercise will be environment friendly. Secondly, to ensure that only “political professionals” will represent sovereign voters in the Parliament and PCs, the national Election Commission (EC) has to stipulate compulsory minimum eligibility criteria and a standardised structured interview scoring system to all contesting parties (amendable with changing times) on the lines given below. Compulsory minimum eligibility criteria for election candidates include passes in at least two subjects in the General Certificate of Education “Advanced” Level within three attempts (In today’s context, it is not a tall order and it is important to complete at least 12 years of school education), a minimum one year diploma certificate from an acceptable professional body (it is important to integrate into the society from school and to develop the ability to select the best alternative among many options and to present facts logically), being below 65 years of age as at the date of closing nominations, a letter of undertaking to produce an “asset declaration” as per the specimen of the national EC dated within seven days prior to closing nominations, a letter of undertaking to produce a “good health” certificate from a registered medical practitioner issued within one month before the interview, and suggested main qualifications and traits with upper limits for a national EC structured Interview scoring system totaling 300 marks for eligible candidates (educational qualifications as per national EC eligibility criteria – 50/16.67% plus, professional qualifications in law, economics, accountancy and related banking and political science – 55/18.33% +, computer literacy – 50/16.67% +, multilingual communication skills – 50/16.67% +, social integration and political experience – 35/11.66% +, and overall suitability – 60/20% equals women and youth imperatives (20) plus physical fitness – age (10) plus clean public and private life (15) plus “country first” attitude and attributes such as honesty, high morals and general knowledge as practiced in public and private life (15).
The procedure for District level Interviews using the national EC scoring sheet. An interview panel with five members (including its Chairperson) appointed by the relevant District level party hierarchy shall first check the veracity of all the educational, professional, compulsory qualifications and character, referee and medical certificates of the eligible applicants called for the interview and consensually allocate marks subject to the given limits (part qualifications will receive lesser marks). Scores shall be marked independently by panel members based on their own assessment, except that women and youth shall carry full marks. After completing the interviews, the total score of each applicant as given by each panel member shall be added up and a preliminary list in merit order shall be prepared for the District under the signature of all five Panel members. A separate panel shall be selected for each District by the District party hierarchy.
Procedure with nomination lists is that, after the interviews, the following steps have to be taken subject to specific closing dates imposed by the national EC. Contesting parties and groups to prepare, sign and forward electorate and District-wise preliminary nomination lists in merit order, to the national EC, with a few extra names in merit order at the bottom of their lists. The names of at least one woman and one youth below 35 years should appear among every five nominees in the final District or electorate or central pool-wise merit lists of candidates. The national EC shall publish those merit lists in print and other effective media (at least one Sinhala, Tamil and English national newspaper) to allow public scrutiny, objections and/or clearance before a date specified by the national EC. The national EC will scrutinise the public objections and responses and re-forward them to the parties concerned with its own recommendations. The parties will accordingly finalise their nomination lists and submit them for registration along with duly signed affidavits prepared as per the specimens of the national EC. If any lapses or disqualifications are observed, the returning officer can allow possible rectifications within the closing date or the rejection of the nominations of such candidates or lists. If disqualifications are detected after the election, they can be challenged in courts through election petitions. The successful party can name the next corresponding nominee (woman, youth, etc.) from the relative registered list though normally it would be the next nominee in a merit list. Benefits include the advent of “country first” political professionals such as lawyers, accountants, economists, bankers and wise and experienced political professionals in large numbers, competent in selecting the best alternative among many and interpreting laws and policies, national and decentralised budgets, etc., which are the main objectives of the national Parliament, and which will surely produce “country first”- constructive and consensual debates by decent professionals, maintaining the decorum of the supreme Parliament (this character and attitudinal change is a main expectation of sovereign voters and peaceful “aragalites [those involved in calling for the resignation of the previous Government led by then President Gotabaya Rajapaksa.]”). Simple voters will be spared electing “horses” from lists of “donkeys”. Ensure the required 20% each for women and youth in the Parliament and PCs. Costly and disturbing by-elections can be avoided. The electoral system wins the confidence of the voters. Since decision making becomes more patriotic and rational with a balanced mix of representatives working towards a common objective in the House, hackneyed terms such as “unstable Government”, “hung Parliament”, “bonus seats”, “minimum percentage”, “crossovers”, “deal politics” and “two third majority”, etc., will become irrelevant.
Accommodating first past the post (FPTP), proportional representation (PR) and central pool proponents. If absolutely necessary, the national EC may allow parties to nominate their District candidates in merit order under any one or both of the following captioned nomination lists. The District-wise list as per the proposed meritocratic PR system. The FPTP list in the electorate merit order under each District (160 electorates can be topped up to 196 by nominating more than one candidate to the electorates with higher populations.). The central pool list (the previous Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna method) for parties and groups contesting in a few Districts, say less than 10. The benefits include, that unlike the complex mixed member voting system, this method is simple, reasonable and flexible. It allows all relevant proponents to meet their expectations. The number of seats remains fixed.
A total of 29 national list members too have to be selected as per similar criteria and procedure with an emphasis on their special objectives of multi-community PR and special expertise, as laid down by the national EC. In this instance, a separate District and electorate-wise final national merit list is to be prepared and submitted for registration along with the other main District nomination lists. As a result, unelected candidates from the main District lists cannot be accommodated under the national list. The benefits include that it provides a transparent method to satisfy the voters who also will recognise the quality of the national list members when making their voting decision. Having MPs to meet special objectives augments national unity related efforts and the special expertise requirement in the Parliament. Extra names in merit order can be added to all District nomination lists up to a percentage specified by the national EC.
Discourage the registration of “mushroom” political parties by imposing stringent eligibility and high cash deposit requirements. A total of 353 independent parties and groups contested at the 2020 Election, accounting for 3% of the national votes. Most likely, the proposed eligibility criteria and interview system will act as deterrents for new parties with ulterior motives and agendas. The benefits include shorter ballot papers which will reduce voter confusion, rejected votes and paper related costs, reduced other costs, energy and time wasted in the total process, and the reduced fielding of decoy contestants by major parties to gain power by hook or by crook.
Brand party “election manifesto” as the main consideration for the voter decision, by establishing a monitoring mechanism and an audit procedure to ensure the implementation of the relevant “manifesto” within the given time frame and/or make it a prosecutable document. Benefits include that as a branded genuine document, the “election manifesto” will become the primary determinant for making a wise voter decision. Due to the monitoring and audit procedure, the people will have confidence in the realisation of their expectations. It improves the value of the ballot and the quality of the electoral system.
Introduce a “highest campaign expenditure formula” for all contesting parties and alliances to ensure a “level playing field” (This item has since been legalised but merits further discussion). Benefits include a level playing field that enhances the quality of the election process, that campaign financing can be easily monitored by the authorities, that the party and alliance hierarchies can focus their District campaigns on the “election manifesto” as well as on the quality of their candidates while highlighting the choice list, if any, and that deserving candidates without adequate financial support can come forward.
Ban “crossover” mockery and allow member vacancies to be filled by any corresponding name/s in the relevant registered list. Benefits include that it rejects “deal” politics and restores collective sovereign voter conscience as “principals”, over the individual conscience of “MPs” who are only their “agents” and representatives, allows more flexibility to parties when filling vacancies, prevents the use of highly unethical and corrupt “deal politics” to change the balance of power already created by the sovereign voters for a specific period, while the high cost and disturbing “by-elections” become redundant.
Hold General and PC Elections on one legally specified date using differently coloured ballot papers (except during a transitional period), to ensure the maximum productivity of the electoral and political administration systems. The polling unit for seat determination will be: General Election - country as a single electorate with 225 seats, and the PCs Election - District with the number of seats fixed as per the Delimitation report. Benefits include that all elections will achieve their purpose and objectives. Considering the additional costs, time and energy to be spent to comply with possible health regulations, a massive load of such resources can be saved by the Government in addition to the huge expenditure budget to hold a single national election (a budget of Rs.10 billion was allocated for the Local Government Elections alone). Such simple and cost effective steps including even a relevant referendum on the same day will enhance the productivity of the entire electoral process. The electronic voting system would greatly assist. Further, it prevents political interference arising from staggered PCs Elections. The entire country will save millions of precious “man hours” resulting in enhanced productivity. Practically, the voters can decide on their ballots more rationally.
(The writer is a former Deputy General Manager of the Bank of Ceylon)
–------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect those of this publication.